Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Recently I came to the realization that somebody had surreptitiously embedded a notion in my mind and I may have identified the culprit. He goes by the name of Wallace Thornhill. His tactic involved a cleverly placed blog sight that was hard enough to find and easy enough to lose track of that I did exactly that, I lost track of it for about 3 years. Over this time this website has taken on a mythical status in my mind in that I started to doubt that I seen it and started to wonder if it was just something I'd seen in a dream once. So, thank you (Aardwolf) for this link, it brings it full circle for me. Because now I know who I can blame for this crazy notion that H2O microdroplets can stay suspended in the atmosphere as a consequence of the electricity that comes flowing in as the solar wind. Now if I should fall under investigation for believing such a crazy notion (not to mention passing it on to others) I will be able to direct them to the genuine source of this lunacy. (And I'm also wondering to what degree Bob Johnson might be involved in all of this.)

Allow me to present the evidence that, I believe, substantiates this assertion:

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/electric-weather/Electric Weatherby Wal Thornhill | May 30, 2004 <huge snip>"Recent high-altitude balloon flights find that charge is not built up in the cloud, it already exists in the ionosphere above. In January 2002 I argued the electric universe model[5]:"<small snip>“Thunderstorms are not electricity generators, they are passive elements in an interplanetary circuit, like a self-repairing leaky condenser. The energy stored in the cloud ‘condenser’ is released as lightning when it short-circuits."<big snip>'“This view accords with a recent report (17 November 2003) in Geophysical Review Letters by Joseph Dwyer of the Florida Institute of Technology, which says that according to conventional theory electrical fields in the atmosphere simply cannot grow large enough to trigger lightning. “The conventional view of how lightning is produced is wrong.” And so “the true origin of lightning remains a mystery.”'“Water vapor in rising air cools and condenses to forms clouds. The conventional explanation for rising air relies upon solar heating. The electrical weather model has an additional galactic energy source (the same that powers the Sun) to drive the movement of air. It is the same energy source that drives ferocious high-level winds on the giant outer planets, where solar energy is extremely weak. Once the water vapor condenses into water droplets it is more plausible that millions of tons of water can remain suspended kilometres above the Earth by electrical means, rather than by thermal updraughts."<snip>“Meteorologists are not used to thinking that electrical phenomena could be important to the normal hydrodynamic model,” he says.Wal Thornhill

And:

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16582#p117061Chapter One: Air Brakes; Surface Tension on Steroids (Section Two of Five)2017 / January (Fifth Paragraph)"Since I knew that convection theory was all wet (nonsense) I knew that other factors must explain the power of storms and the reason storms are so wet (water). Most essentially, I knew that moist air was always heavier, not lighter, than any drier air in its vicinity. And, therefore, whatever model/solution one set upon it had to explain how heavier moist air, somehow, defied gravity. This turned out to have a very elegant and parsimonious solution. The reason heavier than air H2O microdroplets don’t drop out of the sky as a result of gravity (negative buoyancy) is because these microdroplets are suspended by electrostatic forces (an implication of the solar wind). (Note: This will be more explicitly addressed in a subsequent chapter.) (Note: as will be explained in a subsequent chapter, this also has huge implications on how we conceptualize evaporation/sublimation.) And so, putting it all in a nutshell, I knew what nobody else, it seemed, even suspected: the atmosphere contained microdroplets of H2O. It contained vapor, evaporate, aerosol. Even clear moist air contained microdroplets—too small to be seen—but the atmosphere contained exactly zero gaseous, singular molecules of H2O. Not ever. I didn’t know I was lying."

I believe the truths revealed in these passages tell their own story.

The actual incident took place through a typical web search somewhere around 2012 or 2013. And I have not been the same since.

I hope the council will consider this statement an indication of my good faith, and effectively and immediately absolve me of liability for any damages these notions might inflict upon existing scientific institutions.

For me , how i knew the water was held in the air because of electric forces (or charge).

Before a thunderstorm you can see the dark clouds, and you say to yourself, it is going to rain soon.... only at/after the moment of the first lightning strike does the rain start to fall (en masse), this means that the lightning is a 'charge equalizer', and the water is no longer held/pushed up by this charge force and starts falling.

It happens with water because water is a dipolar molecule*, i think we all know this now.. i only learned after that first understanding i had.

The Earth has an electrical field, and water is a dipolar. If the water molecule is oriented correctly, the Earth will repel it, I can believe that. Why would the water molecule remain in the correct orientation though? A lower energy state can be reached by it flipping around the other way and being attracted to the Earth. So that is what would happen.

Daniel Archer:. . . only at/after the moment of the first lightning strike does the rain start to fall (en masse),

James McGinn:Yes, I noticed that too. In movies (especially westerns) its become a cliche, but I think it is a cliche that reflects reality, in my experience.

Daniel Archer:. . . this means that the lightning is a 'charge equalizer', and the water is no longer held/pushed up by this charge force and starts falling.

James McGinn:Yes, I like Wallace's description also:

Wallace Thornhill:" . . . like a self-repairing leaky condenser. The energy stored in the cloud ‘condenser’ is released as lightning when it short-circuits."

James McGinn:(As a side note [raw speculation]: I'm wondering if vortices might facilitate lightning/thunder along the lines of providing a pathway for conductivity.)

However, I should mention, as I will be explained more explicitly further along, I have sharp disagreements with the last sentence of this same passage:

Wallace Thornhill:“The charge across the cloud ‘condenser’ gives rise to violent vertical electrical winds within the cloud, not vice versa.”

James McGinn:More importantly, although I do not agree with this last statement, I certainly do agree, as both of you have indicated, that the dipole properties of H2O are instrumental in storms and atmospheric flow. But I think we have to be cautious that we don't trade one set of misassumptions for another. And, as I will attempt to explain further along that is the problem with this site that Daniel introduced:

Wallace Thornhill:Water Molecule: The oxygen (blue) side of the water molecule is more negative than the hydrogen side (red), forming an electric dipole.

James McGinn:The electronegativity lopsidedness of the H2O molecule makes it a dipole. I agree. But it is at this juncture that many people make a huge conceptual error. And this error is reinforced by the *Hyperphysics* site linked above. Therein it states the following: "Such molecules are said to be polar because they possess a permanent dipole moment. A good example is the dipole moment of the water molecule."

This is an erroneous oversimplification. The H2O molecule is a dipole but it is erroneous to refer to it as "permanent". In reality it is not static but highly variable. In order to conceptualizd the why and how of H2O's dipole force being highly variable and not static (not constant) a shift in perspective is necessary. Consider the electron cloud around the oxygen atom of each water molecule. The protons of the oxygen atom are the source of force associated with H2O polarity and the electron cloud around this oxygen atom is what neutralizes that force. When the electrons are off center (do not completely encircle) the oxygen atom the H2O molecule has a significant dipole force. However, when situational factors cause the electrons to perfectly encircle the oxygen atom the dipole force is, essentially, turned off, like a switch--and H bonds do just that! Think about that. H bonds neutralize H2O polarity because they cause the electron cloud to more perfectly encircle the oxygen atom. In other words--and even though it seems too ironic to be true--H bonds neutralize the force that underlies their own strength! It is the implications of this strange fact that underlie all of H2O's numerous (upwards of 70) anomalies.

Another way to say this is that the asymmetry (lopsidedness) of H2O--it being the source of its dipole force by way of it effect on the centrality of the electron cloud around the oxygen atom--is counteracted or alleviated as a consequence of the H2O molecules propensity to form H bonds with other H2O molecules, thereby alleviating the asymmetry (lopsidedness) that underlies it being a dipole (yes, I know that is confusing, sorry, but the way I stated it here is actually accurate). And so, because of the prevalence of (polarity neutralizing) H bonds associated with liquid H2O, the H2O in the atmosphere, being a liquid (vapor) does not have much of any dipole forces. (Again, I know this must sound extremely confusing. But this is accurate.) However, as you will soon see, there is a huge and extremely signifcant exception to all of this: surface tension.

Wallace Thornhill:In an electric field, the water molecule will rotate to line up with the field.

JM:Well, as I explained above, I believe all of non-frozen water in the atmosphere is liquid--microdroplets. None of it is steam. And, therefore, its dipole force is all (or mostly) neutralized (exception--surface tension--to follow) by the H2O molecules therein having formed H bonds with each other. So, I doubt there being much of any lining up with electric fields taking place.

Wallace Thornhill:When it condenses in a cloud the average electric dipole moment of a water molecule in a raindrop is 40 percent greater than that of a single water vapor molecule.

JM:I don't think this is accurate either. Firstly, as explained above, the non-ice moisture in the atmosphere is never not liquid microdroplets. Secondly, also as explained above, dipole moment is largely minimized in the liquid microdroplets. Now comes the exception: the dipole moment can be increased as a function of surface tension. Specifically, when you maximize surface area you simultaneously maximize surface tension.

In other words, since, as described above, H bonds are self neutralizing the breaking (as occurs naturally along a surface) of H bonds reverses the neutralization and, effectively, acts to activate dipole forces. (Let this sink in for a second.) Wind shear conditions amplify this effect--maximize surface area/tension. This produces a strong plasma that is the stuff of the vortices that deliver the low pressure energy of storms and that, frankly, are the naturally occurring lubricants of atmospheric flow (vortices provide the contents of their flow isolation from atmospheric friction) allowing the earth to achieve a greater degree of thermal equillibrium, making our planet a nice place to live.

Another misconception associated with this Hyperphysics site is reflected in the description of surface tension here:http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... en.html#c3It states: "The cohesive forces between molecules down into a liquid are shared with all neighboring atoms. Those on the surface have no neighboring atoms above, and exhibit stronger attractive forces upon their nearest neighbors on the surface. This enhancement of the intermolecular attractive forces at the surface is called surface tension."

This description fails to identify the uniqueness of H2O surface tension, as described in the paragraph that preceded the above paragraph. This Hyperphysics description may be correct for many liquids (actually, I'm not too sure about that either) but it is not correct for H2O in that, as described above, the surface tensional properties of H2O are much more dramatic as a consequence of the reversal of polarity neutralization that occurs on the surface of water that itself is a consequece of limits to H bonding that are imposed by a two dimensional surface.

Electric current does not, in my opinion, play a role as any kind of direct engine of flow in the atmosphere. It is, however, instrumental in keeping the microdroplets suspended. And, as such, it is essential to the precursory conditions underlying the formation of the vortices that form along moist/dry wind shear boundaries, the moist half of which couldn't exist if something wasn't keeping the heavier than air H2O microdroplets from falling due to gravity. Itself being an implication of what I refer to as the zeroing of polarity of symmetric H bonding, as explained explicitly in Bill Chapter One: Air Brakes, it is the amazing energy conservation properties of liquid H2O that enable it to collect and concentrate kinetic energy that sets the stage for the surface maximized, H2O-based plasma that comprises the vortices that are the naturally occurring lubricants of atmospheric flow. (Don't worry if what is stated in this last sentence does not make a lot of sense to you yet.)

willendure wrote:The Earth has an electrical field, and water is a dipolar. If the water molecule is oriented correctly, the Earth will repel it, I can believe that. Why would the water molecule remain in the correct orientation though? A lower energy state can be reached by it flipping around the other way and being attracted to the Earth. So that is what would happen.

Just ignoring this observation then? As I say, if the water molecule needs to change its orientation to fall, then that is what will happen.

This demonstrates how sheepish and cult-minded humans are. Meteorology is just a cult.

But I think the same is reflected here in this forum. EU is concerned about things that out in space. Strangely, when it comes to things here on this planet EU is just as complacent as the rest of society. Where is the outrage at the blatant lunacy of meteorology's storm theory?

It seems to me that most of society ignores EU because most EU arguments have to do with things that have to obvious benefit to society--things happening millions of light years away. And here is an opportunity to show the practical benefits of advanced understanding, but most what we see from EU is complacency about earth's weather and overemphasis of space weather.

Hadn't seen this one before, what a great synopsis by the genius V-man. Thank you for posting.

Today some of his observations could be updated with satellite data, and the physics simplified by replacing his "attractions" with charge flows and thermionic emission repulsions.His insights concerning terrestrial weather, planetary motions and gravity were seminal, if yet still not given credit by today's scientists benefitting immensely from his intuition and hard work.

But I think ozone is not mixed into the rest of the atmosphere because it is produced by oxygen and sunlight interacting, and this effect is strongest at a certain height. Ozone is mixed in, but it is also unstable so it may decompose before it reaches other altitudes.